Keep a Lens if buying the OMD 5

[dedmans]

Nice to be back on here. Thinking of saving to buy the new Olly. I have a E510 with 14-42 and 40-150 bought as a kit. Is it sensible to keep the longer zoom when selling on or, not worthwhile. I am still smarting at the horrendous loss I made when bought the E400!

[Bob Andersson]

Hi dedmans,

Welcome back. I'm still highly delighted with my E-M5 so go for it! Not all 4/3rds lenses AF well with contrast AF systems but here's a list of those that are compatible (source):

• Olympus Zuiko 25mm f/2.8 Pancake
• Olympus Zuiko 9-18mm f/4-5.6
• Olympus Zuiko 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 II
• Olympus Zuiko 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6
• Olympus Zuiko 40-150mm f/4-5.6
• Olympus Zuiko 70-300mm f/4-5.6
• Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm f/1.4 Asph
• Panasonic Leica D Vario-Elmar 14-50mm f/3.8-5.6 Asph Mega O.I.S.
• Panasonic Leica D Vario-Elmar 14-150mm f/3.5-5.6 Asph Mega O.I.S.

How fast they AF is another matter. The only one I have experience of is the last one on the list (bought for use as a superzoom) and while it focusses reliably it doesn't do so particularly quickly, especially when compared to the other glass I have listed in my signature below.

Bob.

[dedmans]

Thanks Bob. I will look them all up. Another thought is my old Series 1 70-210 with an adapter, would that be possible to use on a tripod shots of cricketers etc. in mind. The reason for thinking about keeping the long lense is that the replacements to use for long sports shots mostly are rather expensive. By the way just returned from meeting an old colleague of you all, Mr. Ed Teng who is now a doctor.

[Bob Andersson]

.
Congratulations to Ed.

Almost any lens with manual controls can be used with the E-M5 (I've even used a Mamiya 150mm f/2.8 as well as a couple of my old Zuiko lenses) with the right adaptor. The camera can easily be set up to provide a magnified view to aid focussing and if you tell it the focal length it will also provide image stabilisation. Of course the small pixels on the sensor do provide a fairly stiff test of the optics and some of the m4/3rds lens mount adaptors aren't as cheap as one would hope but they do provide an option.

The lens line-up keeps getting better. We'll have to wait until 2013/2014 but both the the new 42.5mm f/1.2 and 150mm f/2.8 MFT lenses might make it onto my shopping list.

Bob.

[dedmans]

I do not wish to seem daft but when I looked for adapters on the net it crossed my mind that 'Micro' 4/3rds is a different lens to those on my E510. Is it the case that the lenses on my E510 will fit on the OMD? Is micro a different fitting? Thanks,
Julian

[Hans]

Yes, it is different and you will need an adaptor, but all functions work.

[dedmans]

Thanks for that Hans.

[dedmans]

On its way!

[pierovera]

Congratulations! Enjoy your purchase

[dedmans]

Camera arrived and not touching it until xmas. Considering wishlist to enable long sports shots and this lense seems the ticket and not very expensive either. It appears that an adapter for 4/3rds to MFT costs about £40 so a correct mount is imperative. Anyone have views on this lense and Bob, it was not in your list?
Panasonic : LUMIX G VARIO45-200mm F4.0-5.6 MEGA O.I.S.

[Bob Andersson]

Hi dedmans,

Congratulations, not only on your new camera but also on your apparently superhuman ability to not touch it! Of course you could still charge the battery...

In the end I went for the L-RS014150E. It works well enough as an all purpose superzoom and focussing is quick enough for my needs (but not fast). It is a superzoom, however, so if the need is for ultimate sharpness at longer focal lengths then maybe there are better choices. If I were starting over I might have skipped that lens and opted instead for the new H-HS35100E but I'm not there and I have yet to see if the reviews confirm that the lens lives up to its promise and price tag! But a 70-200mm with the depth of field of an f/5.6 (all full-frame equivalents) would be a useful lens for sure and, though I've not tested the water, the Leica 14-150mm will probably have held it's value should I decide to sell it.

But whatever you choose if you can find a native m4/3rds lens I think that is likely to be the better option for AF speed and compatibility.

Bob.

[Maestro]

If you already/still have 40-150mm covered, I would think the 75-300mm would be a better addition, although it does cost around twice as much as the 45-200mm.

Just a thought - Mark

[Texphoto]

If you are shooting sports the 4/3's 40-150 may be too slow to focus, and depending on the sport u4/3's might be too slow to focus in general.....maybe you could manual zone focus and get some shots... anyway good luck...

[dedmans]

My old long zoom went with the E510. The newer version of that lens is better made apparently. I know quality is important but I must consider the outlay to be affordable. It is a hobby after all and I am not a pro. Will see how the old Series 1 fares although it only goes to 210mm. Might just post some examples when the time comes of the old glass!

[dedmans]

My word what a camera! cost four times what I got for my E510 with double lens but, a hundred times better! Lovely to handle ,just perfect in weight and feel, point fire .bang . perfect shot with sharpness and quality. Got as a pressy the Lumix 45 - 200 and that combines superbly. Well well pleased. This camera oozes quality. Got my daughter a Nex 5N for her xmas gift and that is pretty good as well.